Judgment : Dt.14.11.2017
Shri S. K. Verma, President
This is a complaint made by one Sri Debapratim Ghosh, s/o Sumanta Kumar Ghosh, flat No.4, Block-II, Atarka Co-operative Housing Society, 1/170, B. P. Township, Patuli, Kolkata-700 094 against The Estillo, Outpace Furniture Pvt. Ltd., 193, N. S. C. Bose Road, P.S.-Regent Park, Kolkata-700 040, OP No.1, The Manager, Estillo, Shop NoG-03 & 49, Metropolis Mall, Hiland Park, Kolkata-700 094, OP No.2 and Bajaj Finserve Lending, office 1201, 12th floor, Infinity Benchmark, Plot G-1, EP & GP, Sector-5, Kolkata-700 091, Proforma OP, praying for direction upon the OPs No.1 & 2 to replace the wardrobe or refund the total amount of Rs.15,950/-along with the interest @ 12% and direction to pay compensation of Rs.20,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.10,000/-.
Facts in brief are that Complainant purchased one wooden wardrobe at a price of Rs.15,950/- along with a shoe rack at a price of Rs.12,950/- total being Rs.28,900/- vide bill No.HP/4696 dt.9.4.2016. Complainant purchased these items after taking finance from OP No.3. Complainant paid the amount of Rs.6,529/- to the OP No.1 & 2 and the rest was financed by the proforma OP No.3. After purchasing the items the wooden wardrobe started deteriorating day by day and became useless due to faded inside colour and broke down. Complainant communicated the same to the OPs No.1 & 2 with the prayer of replacement. But, OP No.1 did not turn up. Thereafter, Complainant lodged a complaint before OP No.1 & 2 for replacement. After repeated requests for replacement, Complainant faced various problems and mental agony. So, Complainant filed this case.
OPs No.1 & 2 filed written version and contested the case by denying all the material allegations. They have denied that they supplied defective items. They have also stated that the items might have been damaged due to act and conduct of the Complainant. So, they have prayed for dismissal of the complaint. OP No.3 did not file any written version.
Decision with reasons
Complainants filed affidavit-in-chief to which OP No.1 & 2 filed questionnaire to which Complainant filed affidavit-in-reply. Similarly, OP No.1 & 2 filed evidence to which Complainant filed questionnaire and OPs filed affidavit-in-reply.
Main point for determination is whether Complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for.
On perusal of the prayer portion, it appears that Complainant has prayed for replacement of the wardrobe or refund of Rs.15,950/-.
In this regard, it appears from the carbon copy of the receipt that Complainant purchased a wardrobe by paying Rs.15,950/- on 9.4.2016. Thereafter, Complainant filed this case after a gap of about nine months. This suggests that an item which was purchased after paying Rs.15,950/- should not get damaged within a period of nine months. There is no allegation by OP that the wardrobe got damaged due to the act and conduct of the Complainants. OPs No.1 & 2 have not taken any positive plea to rebut the allegations made by the Complainant. So, it can be presumed that the Complainant proved the allegation by filing affidavit-in-chief and documents. It is of common prudence that had the wardrobe not been damaged the Complainant would not have brought this complaint because Complainant purchased two items. But he brought allegation against one of these.
In this regard, OPs did not appear to have any contrary fact to rebut the allegations. So, we are of the view that Complainant is entitled to the replacement of the wardrobe, in default refund of the price of the wardrobe.
Complainant has prayed for compensation to the tune of an amount of Rs.20,000/-.
In this regard, it is clear that Complainant suffered mental pain and agony due to the unwarranted conduct of the OPs and so they are liable to pay at least Rs.10,000/- to the Complainant. Complainant has also prayed for Rs.10,000/- as litigation cost.
In this regard, we are of the view that Complainant is entitled to Rs.5,000/-as litigation cost.
Hence,
ordered
CC/122/2017 and the same is allowed on contest in part. OPs are directed to replace the wardrobe within one month of this order. In default, they are directed to refund Rs.15,950/- to the Complainant with interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of this order. They are also directed to pay compensation of Rs.10,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.5,000/- to the Complainant within the above mentioned period, in default this amount shall also carry interest @ 10%p.a.till realization.
